SUBJECT: Usage of "Nuclear" Terminology in Officer and Enlisted Performance Reports

1. During Quarter Nuclear Surety Council Meetings during the past year the issue of proper use of nuclear-related terminology in reports and decorations has come up. HQ USAFE has received requests from the field for detailed guidance on whether or not using such terminology is classified, or under what conditions its use is prohibited.

2. The use of the nuclear terms by themselves, in evaluations and awards, is not classified. However, Operation Security and Essentials Elements of Friendly Information must be carefully assessed when writing performance reports and awards. The attached memorandum at Tab 1 provides specific guidance and instruction.

TAB 1

 Usage Of Nuclear Mission Terminology In Officer And Enlisted Performance Reports

1. By long-standing policy, the USAF neither confirms nor denies the presence of nuclear weapons at any specific location. Furthermore, the presence of US nuclear weapons in certain NATO countries is classifed NATO SECRET. However, this does not mean that commanders cannot use the term "nuclear" in association with a specific unit in an unclassified document. The key is to limit comments directly related to nuclear issues to a unit's or individual's capability, not actual activity. The fact that a certain unit has a nuclear capability is NATO Unclassified. Good OPSEC and host nation sensitivity dictates that raters minimize public comments about nuclear capability, but evaluations and decorations are official documents that are not subject to automatic disclosure, and therefore it is permissible make mention of contributions to a unit's nuclear capabilities. While this may seem to infer the presence of nuclear weapons at a certain base, it does not confirm such presence.

2. Inspections and exercises are events to assess and practice capabilities. All references to inspections and exercises and activities related to those events are acceptable as long as they do not refer to War Reserve weapons or operational mission. Examples of authorized comments:

- Supervised qualification training of five technicians; strict adherence to technical data resulted in certification on general maintenance and LLC exchange
- Performed flawlessly with host nation load crew during Nuclear Surety Inspection directly contributing to "Excellent" rating
- A duty title referencing nuclear capability, such as "Nuclear Munitions Technician"
- Stating that an individual was an outstanding performer during a Nuclear Surety Inspection
- SSgt Jones is the most competent nuclear weapons maintenance technician in the squadron
- SSgt Smith was recognized as an outstanding performer during the 2009 Nuclear Surety Inspection

3. References to actual weapons or conduct of inventories are not allowed. Examples of comments you cannot use:

- SSgt Davis performed a flawless LLC operation on a WR weapon during the Nuclear Surety Inspection
- SSgt Rogers technical skill was vital to maintaining nuclear weapons
- SSgt Thompson conducted a flawless inventory of assigned nuclear weapons valued at $2B

4. The definitive guidance is contained in DoD 5200.1-R, Information Security Program; ACO Directive Number 80-6, NUCLEAR SURETY MANAGEMENT FOR THE WEAPONS STORAGE AND SECURITY SYSTEM (NU); and AFI 31-407, AIR FORCE NUCLEAR WEAPONS SECURITY CLASSIFICATION POLICY (U). Reviewers of any AF documentation referencing nuclear capability, to include Evaluations and Awards are responsible for adherence to the above regulations.

5. Raters and reviewers should contact their local Information Protection (IP) office or their OPSEC office if they have any questions.